Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: In before JERB-KILLITAXES AND REGULATIONZ (Score 1, Interesting) 170

by Dimwit (#49486901) Attached to: 2K, Australia's Last AAA Studio, Closes Its Doors

Australia has corporate tax rates that are in general lower than those in, say, the United States. The US has lower tax rates for corporations with income less than $100,000, but I would very much assume that this studio made more than that. Regulations for this sort of industry are essentially the same around the world as well.

The cost of doing business in Australia is negatively impacted because of major time zone differences from other English-speaking nations, and the significantly higher costs of transportation to/from and telecommunications with what is really a very geographically isolated nation.

Comment: I probably would've gotten the death penalty... (Score 5, Funny) 629

Hah. On the Windows 3.1 systems at my high school I would change the screensaver message to something like "FUCK THA POLICE" or whatever and then use the ATTRIB command to mark WIN.INI as read-only, meaning it was impossible to change the message back using the UI.

Comment: Re:Pointless (Score 1) 755

by Dimwit (#49066939) Attached to: Removing Libsystemd0 From a Live-running Debian System

I have not seen a laptop in close to a decade that didn't work 100% out of the box with Linux. Ubuntu on my laptop actually supported more of the hardware than OEM Windows did without having to find third-party drivers on some website. I remember having to manually configure my sound card with Linux, but I don't remember the last time I did it; it's been at least a decade if not more.

So yeah, the old objections to Linux are, to use an appropriately old term, FUD.

Comment: What I'd love to see for 4.0 (Score 1) 199

by Dimwit (#49047331) Attached to: Torvalds Polls Desire for Linux's Next Major Version Bump

The main thing I'd like to see for 4.0 is a massive simplification of the kernel, removing features that are no longer used anywhere. There's a lot of duplicated functionality in the kernel - two different ways to report hotplug events, three different ways to report ACPI events, several dozen filesystems, some of which don't actually work or even have userland tools that will compile on modern kernels.

So I'd like to see a winnowing of kernel features, down to a saner, all-known-to-work set.

Also, can we please at some point make /proc a bit more sane? Why do I write kernel configuration parameters to files in proc? Why not to sysfs or configfs? /proc, IMHO, should just hold process information. It's confusing.

Comment: What do we use a phone for? (Score 2, Interesting) 307

by Dimwit (#48876161) Attached to: Blackberry CEO: Net Neutrality Means Mandating Cross-Platform Apps

I would argue that there should be some sort of regulation that ensures that phones are interoperable with one another for "phone stuff". That is, if you sell a phone in this country, by law it should be able to make a phone call to every other phone sold in the country. The problem is, what qualifies as "phone stuff" is rapidly expanding.

iMessage is a good example. Apple is trying to leverage its dominant market position to make text messaging something that's iPhone only. Remember the whole debacle with people who had an iPhone and then didn't suddenly not being able to receive text messages from other people who still had iPhones. Apple's solution was broken and only partially effective - and I think at least somewhat intentionally so. Same with FaceTime. You want to talk to your friends with an iPhone? Well, you need an iPhone too!

So yeah, we as a society need to decide what we define as "phone stuff". Having the ability to communicate with every other phone for "phone stuff" is critical from an economic perspective, and eventually will also be so from a safety perspective. Requiring inter-phone communications to be standardized isn't too far-fetched of an idea.

(Requiring the same non-phone-stuff apps to work on different platforms though is stupid.)

Comment: So...don't be disposable. (Score 3, Insightful) 271

by Dimwit (#48866889) Attached to: The Tech Industry's Legacy: Creating Disposable Employees

This sounds a little insensitive, but, don't be disposable. You're a Windows admin. Great. So are a million other people. If you're a Windows admin who also knows some programming, there are maybe 250,000 people with your skill set. If you add in that you know some Linux, maybe 100,000 people.

What I'm saying is, if you want to be safer than the average employee, don't be average. Enhance your skill set.

Comment: Re:Slashdot today. (Score 1) 142

by Dimwit (#48759501) Attached to: Scientist Says Potential Signs of Ancient Life in Mars Rover Photos

This isn't even my first Slashdot account, my old one dates from 1998 or 1999.

When I first got on Slashdot, there was meaningful, technical discussion. A good number of actual experts in scientific and technical fields were present. Yeah there were always trolls and people racing to have the initial comment, but I feel like the entire tone of Slashdot has changed. You rarely get technical experts on here anymore, the trolls are just as prevalant if not more, and the entire readership has turned a lot to the reactionary right - scientific stores get inundated with "but that's socialism!" comments. There's even a fair amount of junk science in the comments now.

I read Slashdot now solely for the headlines, primarily because I never got the hang of Reddit. The comment section has been basically useless for a while now.

Comment: I have a laptop and a phone, why a tablet too? (Score 1) 328

by Dimwit (#48696745) Attached to: Is the Tablet Market In Outright Collapse? Data Suggests Yes

Seriously, if my phone isn't capable of doing whatever task I need to do, it means I probably need my full-on laptop anyway. Add in the fact that a tablet either requires wifi or requires cell service but can't make calls and it becomes obvious why the market is behaving this way.

Comment: Some practical examples (Score 4, Informative) 153

by Dimwit (#48611617) Attached to: In IT, Beware of Fad Versus Functional

So over my nearly 20 years in IT/CS, I've seen a few:

I worked for a large retailer. We migrated from an old frame-relay leased-line network to a much more capable multihomed IP-over-VPN configuration to connect all of our retail locations around the country back to HQ. This new system worked well. Our CIO retired, and a new one was brought in. CIO Magazine a year or so later had an article about "Satellite Internet, The Future?" Our CIO then "spontaneously" started lobbying to get us to scrap our efficient, inexpensive, high-bandwidth network for a satellite system.

I can't tell you how many projects I saw rewritten in Ruby on Rails just because that was the new hotness, only to be abandoned later when everyone realized that Ruby is awful.

I myself wrote a bunch of stuff in Erlang not because it was the best language but because that was the new hotness.

Two unchanging things I've noticed are:

A lot of time, the new hotness makes common problems go away or common tasks easier, but ends up making more complex things harder. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but people tend to get stuck in the model of thinking that the new technology has to be used for everything, and they end up shoehorning their complex projects into frameworks that aren't the best choice.

No matter what the new technology is, and no matter how fantastic it is, it's not going to replace C/C++ for systems-level work, and Python and Perl aren't going anywhere. Truly successful technologies have long tails.

The two most beautiful words in the English language are "Cheque Enclosed." -- Dorothy Parker

Working...